PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 8/19/15 

Received: August 19, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8kmu-r2g0

Comments Due: August 28, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule- Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-4951

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: Benjamin Prybutok

Address: 

3 Horseshoe Drive

Mount Laurel, 08054

Email: bpryb718@gmail.com

Phone: 856-701-9195

General Comment

My experience in the financial services industry has been over 30 years rendering advice to 

customers within every financial distribution channel in the financial services industry. This 

experience has been as a registered representative and licensed insurance agent. My experience 

has been with two national wirehouses, i.e Merrill, Lynch, Smith Barney, to Insurance broker 

dealers, 2 major banks and finally and presently with Allstate an introducing broker dealer. 

Serving the pub;ic over 30 years on a commission basis has crystallized my thoughts on the issue 

of the Fiduciary Standard

I believe that the "best interest standard" in most cases is the spirit which most professionals in 

my field take, as we have both suitability standards and certain rules i.e Know your customer. 

The best interst standard needs to be adopted within the framework of both the broker dealer 

community and RIA's. What I mean is that a representative or advisor working within either 

environment ought to be able to execute on the advice with o limitation as to product selection or 

compensation arrangement. For me to be licensed I require series 7, 73 and if I want to charge 

fee(s) i need a Series 65 or 66. While I am licensed I maybe unable to execute on advice 
rendered because of the limitations that are present within the entity that holds my licenses. 

My thoughts to the Department are to require the firms and institutions to be outfitted differently 

for the 21st century. That being a broker dealer with limitations will not cut it that an open 

architecture where the advisors can get compensated on a fee basis or commission basis , where 

compensation is neutral with respect to proprietary and non-proprietary vehicles, where there is 

an extensive selling agreement for both variable annuities and mutual funds. The elimination of 

backdoor payments by fund companies for shelf space.

My firm belief is that the companies and institutions where licensed professionals must be 

affiliated are ought to be required to have a best interest standard and if they can not provide it 

oh well they adapt or go out of business or merge with other firms that have the capital to handle 

such change. The standard being institutionally adopted would be more workable and eliminate 

conflicts of interest and present a more level compensation arrangement in the industry.

Consider this for a moment... Many companies are ISO certified and have quality programs in 

place why doesn't the financial services industry in the US have the same type of structure. if 

they did we wouldn't be spending anytime on this. 

This rule is great and needs work simply put place it on the firms RPOVIDE THEM WITH 

FIRM GUIDLINES no different than the ISO standards and force a quality program on them 

watch how fast things change.